Not every lead developer here is a MTA worker, but many have their hands on track maps. Don't badger him for his work on the 5 because its his work. Just because he is maybe not a know developer doesnt automatically mean he has to give up his developing rights just because some else who is known has been doing it. OpenBVE is an open-source game remember that he is free to do what he wants. Don't tell him he can't release something if it's his work. With that said this 5 beta looks really good

1. I'm sorry if I wasn't specific enough for you. Most, not all, lead developers have the tracks maps, as most, not all, work for the MTA.

2. Reading is fundamental. I have nothing against @Ztraintobroad's work on the 5. Like you said, it is his work. I am glad there are more developers working to code the NYC Subway system for OpenBVE. However, all I'm saying is that he should have contacted one of the lead developers about developing the route to prevent: a. Competition to see who codes better, as route developing is not a competition b. To let other people know a non-fiction project has been started, and so is no need to duplicate it (2 developers coding the same route, but independently of each other). If it was a fictional project, you don't need to tell anybody anything (obviously).

3. Reading is fundamental. What does being a "known" developer have to do with what I said? Also, I said NOTHING about "giving up his developing rights." If he wants to develop, let him. There is not a single person that is going to tell him no. Like I said before, and I will say it again, my only issue is that the lead developers were not contacted before he started his project. Two developers working on the same line and co-developing it is great, but independently of each other? That is my issue.

4. Reading is fundamental. Where did I say he can't release it? Please, please, please quote it. I did not say he can not release it. When @ZtraintoBroad finishes the route and he wants to release it for everyone to use, there is nothing and no one saying that he can't. All I am trying to prevent is 2 Developers working on the same route, independently of each other ESPECIALLY since it is a non-fiction line.

Now, if it was one developer, we all know who your talking to. If it was 2 developers working to develop the same route, we all know who you are talking to. Did you catch on yet? Now we have a situation where 2 developers, working on the same route, but independently of each other, so who are you talking to? Since no one knows (except yourself), a question like this will be asked by one or both of the developers:

There is absolutely nothing wrong with showing both of them the same gratitude. We are a community, and should always support each other. When you have to specify who you are showing support to, and have to do so in a manner that doesn't show favoritism, doesn't create a competition in route developing, and doesn't cause any issues to occur between the developers, that is when it becomes a problem.

6. Spell check your post before posting. Your use of grammar and punctuation is horrible.

You can continue to point out my errors if you want. Ill put in a couple just for you ... Did you catch that? My comment wasn't only directed toward you, but it was nice of you to respond on some points that i mentioned.

I don't remember asking you for your issue. I simply spoke on the matter of the track maps which is why I quoted you. I could name lead developers that have tracks maps but are not MTA Workers, so yes most but not all. This makes it unfair for you to tell this developer to "have fun Rikers". The rest of my comment was simply to the following comment.

First off, the 5 is not supposed to be released as a BETA, and someone else is working on this.This is definitely a slap in the face for the developers working on the 5 and other routes. Hence why people are going to not release any routes.

This is how being "known" or "developing rights" comes into play. So all of that "one developer...co-developer" stuff was therefore not needed to be explained to me. Thanks for the commentary though!

Ztraintobroad

Superior? The hell are you talking about. I know that your one of the few members on this site that don't like me, and I'm quite ok with that. But here's something I DON'T like, and that's bringing me down all the time wether it's anything that I post. It's not on here though, it's on Facebook and a lot of other sites.

You saying "two developers working on the same route isn't right" is false. We have had SO many routes being developed by well know developers (not trying to be rude just stating a fact) that weren't completed even though they have been in development since 2013. Some of these developers hold off on the realistic routes to work on their fictional routes. That's their decision, and I respect that, which is why I start developing those real routes on my own as a failsafe. If this developer doesn't finish the route and I finish it before him, we have a line that's released to the public and one step closer to having all subway routes in BVE. It's that simple. It's not to have "competition" as you call it, it's a rather logical plan to ensure ALL routes are done for BVE by the end of 2017. I agrees with TheExpress/XD60 on all his points.

Ztraintobroad

I have been using way to many Sketchup objects in the manhattan portion of the (7) which is lagging it really badly, so I had to do the following:

I am recreating all objects for Times Square, 5th Avenue, Grand Central, and Vernon Blvd and Hunters Point. The main point of this is to reduce lag by 75% which will make it easier to play with. Most of all the objects are now being made by hand.

And your STILL running your mouth. Stop cluttering the thread for Christ's sake.

Last one talking. You responding to what I said just makes it worse. So please continue wasting your time. And you used the wrong definition of superior. Also, you "assume" that I don't like like you. I don't like your strategy when you solve issues, but you as a person I neither like or dislike. Now I understand why your developing routes that are in progress as a "failsafe", according to you. Still confused, but understand. Now we can leave this issue in the past where it belongs, specifically 2016